Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mistasam]

Wow, that was spot on  I'm not a YammieNoob fan either but they made great points and presented it really well. Why anybody would buy a Zero now is beyond me.

[DonTom]

Wow, that was spot on  I'm not a YammieNoob fan either but they made great points and presented it really well. Why anybody would buy a Zero now is beyond me.

Is it just the SR/F and SR/S where they do that?

I don't have a problem with them doing such. It saves us the hassle of installation when we only need a download to get something to work.

For an example, I added heated grips to my Harley. Not only did it cost me a few hundred bucks or so, it took about a day of my time. It sure would have been nice if I only needed to pay for a download and could do something else as it is being downloaded and installed.

Zero is not in business to lose money. They do whatever they can to keep the prices reasonable. Make all the bikes exactly the same and then simply sell us the software. As Tesla started doing, yet remains to be the car with the highest customer satisfaction of ALL cars in the USA--even ICE.


"Tesla has the most loyal customers of any car company with an overall satisfaction rating of 90%. "

-Don-  Reno, NV

[mistasam]

Yammie brought up the question of ownership, and I feel like that's a huge problem with Zero's Cypher Store DLC thing. I bought a bike (the hardware) but I'm not getting to use it unless I pay more. I understand that it's more cost-effective to manufacture one bike instead of lots of different ones, but just sell us a bike that's fully unlocked. If what they're making costs $27k, sell it for $27k. At least then we can properly compare motorcycle brands with their full specs, and at that point, it doesn't make sense to buy a Zero over the others. They're more expensive,have less power, get less range, and charge slower no matter how you configure them.. and they cost more 

Zero should be lowering their prices instead of trying to milk us for everything we have.

[TheRan]

But the thing that actually matters is, are you paying extra for the hardware that is preinstalled but can't be used unless you pay even more to unlock it? Is a 2022 model more expensive than what a 2021 model was? If it's not then there's nothing to complain about, it's just feeling entitled to have something.

[DonTom]

Yammie brought up the question of ownership, and I feel like that's a huge problem with Zero's Cypher Store DLC thing. I bought a bike (the hardware) but I'm not getting to use it unless I pay more. I understand that it's more cost-effective to manufacture one bike instead of lots of different ones, but just sell us a bike that's fully unlocked. If what they're making costs $27k, sell it for $27k. At least then we can properly compare motorcycle brands with their full specs, and at that point, it doesn't make sense to buy a Zero over the others. They're more expensive,have less power, get less range, and charge slower no matter how you configure them.. and they cost more 

Zero should be lowering their prices instead of trying to milk us for everything we have.

I will only agree if you can prove they are making a large profit. By doing it this way, we have a choice if we want to pay for the features or not.


It's probably cheaper for them just to make all the bikes the same. Some may not want the extra features. For an example, I do NOT want the heated grips on an electric bike. I ride mostly ICE in the winter and mostly electric in the summer.


But if I do want to ride electric in the winter, I use my battery heated gloves that work quite well.


And as I explained, I wouldn't use the auto-pilot on my Tesla if it were for free. So why would I want to pay extra for it? This way should keep everybody happy, but some people just don't like it because you have useless hardware until you pay for it. Not a big deal, IMO, unless it weighs a lot, gets in the way of other stuff, or things like that.


If we just wouldn't think about all the hardware being there already, then it wouldn't bother any of us. But I see it as more of an advantage. Save us the time and hassles with installation if we decide we do want some of those features.


BTW, did I hear it has a reverse that can be unlocked? That is one I would surely be glad to pay for. But Energicas come with it.


But with all of you guys complaining about it on Zeros, I do have to wonder if Zero is making a big marketing mistake. Sounds like they could lose a few sales to Energica over such things.


But I can only say I am not bothered by it. But perhaps I am used to it, because that was the way it was in my Tesla in year 2018. I am glad it is an option, as I do NOT want to pay the 6K$ for something I won't even use. BTW, I think Tesla forcing our hands to be on the steering wheel defeats the entire purpose of the autopilot. They can keep it. I am glad I didn't have to pay an extra 6K$ for it.


-Don- Reno, NV

[MVetter]

Sure, they're going to garner some negative feedback. But I expect, monetarily, this will be a net positive for them. Because people will buy it. To illustrate my point, Don, there is a a lot of this that goes on in the world of software and videogames. Most recently, a large company known as Blizzard Entertainment made headlines for their egregious abuse of this whole Pay-2-Unlock or Pay-2-Win model on their recent game Diablo Immortal. I mean seriously negative press. People calling for their heads, saying they'll never support the company again, blah blah blah. The most recent article I saw today is that Diablo Immortal is netting them $1 million in sales per day.

Per. Day. Negative press be damned. It works, and they know it. And now Zero is giving this a shot. Some, including me, might say this was inevitable.

[DonTom]

Per. Day. Negative press be damned. It works, and they know it. And now Zero is giving this a shot. Some, including me, might say this was inevitable.

And we should expect to see more and more of it in the future.

I wonder when Energica will start doing the same (I hope they don't read this! ). I don't want to give them any such ideas . . .


BTW, what was that nonsense about changing the charge times with software? I have a hard time believing they would put an extra AC charger in there that needs to be activated.

-Don- Reno, NV

[mistasam]

Yeah that's my main beef with the new Zeros.. the charger on the bike is software limited, as is the battery. So you're carrying around extra weight that you're not using unless you pay more. I get the convenience of unlocking it with an app, but if I don't want to unlock it, I can't physically remove that weight.

Every year in gas bike land, the bikes get better without going up in price. We expect incremental improvements. Maybe I'm coming off entitled, but I expect a better bike for the same price simply because the tech we have access to is better. Zero is charging more for every single improvement they've made.

When the Livewire dropped $8k in price and Energica came out with new bikes that are vastly better than before, for the same price, I don't see Zero staying competitive.

[flynnstig82r]

I think the counter-argument for the extra pack capacity is that they’ll experience more warranty claims by letting people reach deeper into the pack, so what you’re really buying is a greater chance that they’ll need to pony up a free battery within the 5-year warranty period. Given how common it’s been to see second-hand Zero’s with replacement packs, they probably did need to either lock away more of the pack’s capacity or recoup those costs somehow. I actually wish that Energica would let me pay to reach deeper into my 13.4 pack so that I could make it to San Francisco on one charge.

I’m not defending Zero here, btw. I’m glad that my SR is sold and I never have to deal with their customer service again. My own personal experience with them was not terrible, but reading some of the stories, I’m glad I never needed anything major. I totally get why people would feel ripped off at having to pay to use hardware that’s already installed, but if a company is going to charge for upgrades, I’d rather have them activate instantly than go to a dealer, have them keep the bike way too long while they let some 18 year old kid install it upside down and backwards and then pretend that any resulting problems are not their fault.

[DonTom]

Yeah that's my main beef with the new Zeros.. the charger on the bike is software limited, as is the battery. So you're carrying around extra weight that you're not using unless you pay more.

Can you explain how that works with the charger and the battery? How many watts is the AC charger with and without the update? And is this BS only on the SR/S and SR/F or are they also doing it to other models?


I certainly agree on the battery & charger, I think. But I need it to be explained to me how it works first, with real numbers for KWH of the battery capacity and the charger. Both before the updates and after and the cost of each.


If you must carry a lot of dead weight without the updates, I would say that is very stupid on Zero's part. It's going to turn at least the knowable buyers off.


FWIW, I had no idea Zero was doing such stuff. The first I heard about it is in this thread.


-Don-  Reno, NV

[shayan]

Yeah that's my main beef with the new Zeros.. the charger on the bike is software limited, as is the battery. So you're carrying around extra weight that you're not using unless you pay more. I get the convenience of unlocking it with an app, but if I don't want to unlock it, I can't physically remove that weight.

Every year in gas bike land, the bikes get better without going up in price. We expect incremental improvements. Maybe I'm coming off entitled, but I expect a better bike for the same price simply because the tech we have access to is better. Zero is charging more for every single improvement they've made.

When the Livewire dropped $8k in price and Energica came out with new bikes that are vastly better than before, for the same price, I don't see Zero staying competitive.

Agreed Sam! Imagine what a true 14.4kWh pack with the new cells could do to the bike! It would've made it so much more nimble with much lower weight and much more range as well. I guess the weight from having the extra 3kW charger is still acceptable. At least the FST SR should've had this option I imagine. It would've made the weight of the new SR more comparable to the old one. Now it's like 70lbs heavier.

[DonTom]

I guess the weight from having the extra 3kW charger is still acceptable.

Zero put in a 3KW charger that cannot be used until activated at a cost?  I wouldn't think they would go that far as those cannot be all the cheap to install in every bike when some won't even be used.


-Don-  Reno, NV

[shayan]

I guess the weight from having the extra 3kW charger is still acceptable.

Zero put in a 3KW charger that cannot be used until activated at a cost?  I wouldn't think they would go that far as those cannot be all the cheap to install in every bike when some won't even be used.


-Don-  Reno, NV

Unfortunately that is the truth. All new SR/S/F bikes (except for the new SR) comes with all the (now 6.6kW) hardware pre installed. The premium has 6kW enabled while the standard has 3kW enabled. Remaining upgradable through the store. I guess Zero is betting on all who buy these to upgrade something or the other to recoup the cost. Also, the new units are a flat6 i believe? Morgan can answer exactly what that means compared to the old 3kW units. I guess, its just one 6.6kW unit and not 2 separate 3kW units.

[UlsterZero]

Shayan got in before me on this one, but yes, they are just putting the 6.6kW charger in every bike now, limiting it to 3kW for the standard models, and 6kW for the premium.  Of course this means a little bit extra weight, but I would imagine not as much having twin 3kW chargers fitted.  Indeed, they may well have improved the design of the 6.6kW charger, and it could even be lighter.  Remember, Zero has already stated that the new 14.4+/15.6+ batteries are actually 6lbs lighter than the previous 14.4 batteries.

I know there are lots of people complaining about having to pay extra to unlock parts of the bike that they have already paid for (eg heated grips), but I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding about what is actually happening.  In reality, Zero is including this hardware at no cost, in the hope that at some stage in the future, they will obtain a return on that investment when the owner activates these "upgrades".

Zero is definitely betting on future revenues, however, I think they are also covering their bets pretty well.  I suspect that they are probably offsetting the cost of the additional hardware with the dealer margin that they would have to forgo when selling a Premium model over a standard one.  If the owner eventually opts to upgrade, that transaction is exclusively between them and Zero, there is no dealer involved, so Zero will obtain an even higher margin.

[valnar]

Sure, they're going to garner some negative feedback. But I expect, monetarily, this will be a net positive for them. Because people will buy it.

That depends on whether this initiative reduces the total overall sales of bikes.  They might make more money per bike, but sell less bikes if the PR continues to be bad.  This Yammie Noob video isn't the first rant I've seen about it.